🔗 Share this article

Originally hailed as a landmark piece of legislation that would combat the global scourge of forest loss.

But, the revised version of the European Union's deforestation regulation, once touted as the flagship policy of the Green Deal, has been passed in a severely weakened state, leading to criticism from its initial author and green lawmakers.

"It has been hollowed out," stated Hugo Schally, citing the removal of key obligations for downstream traders to check the origin of commodities like palm oil, soy, wood, beef, rubber, cocoa and coffee.

He warned that fewer obligated actors, less information collected, and less precise origin data would make enforcement and prosecution more difficult.

A Watered-Down Law

Environmental MEP a leading green politician went further, describing the delays, loopholes and exemptions – such as one for paper goods – as the "political dismantling" of the law.

This final text is a far cry from the hopes of more than a million EU citizens who supported an initiative in 2020 calling for a ban on goods linked to forest destruction.

At its launch in 2021, the EU's climate chief the European commissioner called it "the most ambitious law proposed to combat forest loss."

From Ambition to Compromise

The law's unravelling is seen by critics as the EU walking back its green talk. The proposal encountered two major postponements, ostensibly over technical problems, which sparked criticism.

"By reopening this file instead of solving a simple IT problem, the commission opened Pandora’s box," remarked Toussaint.

Originally, the law mandated that firms to trace commodities back to their exact plot of land using geolocation data, making them liable for forest loss along their supply lines with criminal charges and large financial penalties.

"It wasn't bureaucracy for its own sake," the former official said. "These rules were the tool that ensured enforcement, established traceability, and stopped companies from hiding behind opaque production networks."

Intense Lobbying

Yet, the rigorous checks provoked opposition in Brussels from multinational corporations, exporting nations, rightwing parties and EU logging states.

Experts cite last year's European Parliament elections as a turning point, creating a new political majority less favorable toward green regulations.

"The other pressure came from major export markets outside the EU," noted expert Andreas Rasche, suggesting the EU yielded to some requests during negotiations.

The Weakened Final Text

In the final legislation features key dilutions:

• Downstream operators were mostly exempted from submitting due diligence statements.
• A new exemption for small operators was created.
• A option for more reductions was opened for next spring.
• Only a handful of nations – geopolitical adversaries of the EU – will face the strictest monitoring.

"Instead of tightening rules for companies, it stripped them back," said the law's author. "Moving obligations to producers, it reduced accountability."

Uncertainty for Companies

The delays and changes have also caused frustration for businesses that complied early.

"We feel very annoyed because we put a lot of effort into preparing," said Xavier Rombouts. "We invested in software, followed seminars and built a team... now they’re saying it could be altered again. It’s a big frustration."

The Commission's Stance

An EU representative defended the outcome, saying: "We have listened to concerns and taken action to ensure a simple, fair and cost-efficient application."

"The new text ensures stability, which is crucial for companies and national regulators to successfully implement this vitally important law."